Friday, June 20, 2008

Today in the House Judiciary Committee

Follow-Up Questions will be asked and answered.


What a novel idea!

Scott McClellan will face tough questioning from the few Republicans who show up at the hearings House Judiciary Committee today. One of the Republicans expected to show up is Texan Lamar Smith. On the Progressive side, we will have Floridian Robert Wexler (my nominee to keynote the Democratic National Convention.) After years of top-level Bush Administration officials ignoring the committee's subpoenas and refusing to testify, McClellan's willingness to talk signals a special occasion to Wexler:
Scott McClellan made some remarkably significant comments and revelations in his book regarding the truthfulness of the Bush Administration, and under oath, we'll have an opportunity to examine those revelations.

So far, the administration, by and large, has thumbed its nose at Congress. This is, I think, the first and best opportunity the public has had to get a glimpse of the degree of the abuse of power that President Bush and Vice President Cheney have foisted on the American people.

The evidence he provides should be expounded upon and I think Mr. Rove should be brought before the committee. And I don‘t think we should simply stop at issuing contempt citations. I believe we should go further.

The White House has abused the executive privilege process before on many occasions. It's a very difficult argument to make here. I mean, Mr. McClellan has written a book for the whole world to see. Any expectation of privilege or privacy with respect to Mr. McClellan seems to have been long waived. I think it would be a farce if that was attempted.

One of the most interesting parts of what will happen will be not only the questions of the Democrats, but I think it'll be interesting to hear the questions of the Republicans. Some Republicans both on the committee and off the committee may choose to seek to undermine Mr. McClellan's credibility.

I think there will be some people who will possibly take some of Mr. McClellan's testimony and try to insert (it) in the articles of impeachment. I think we have an obligation to follow the evidence one way or the other.
Stay tuned.

8 Moderated Comments:

Blogger Boris said...

You mean, this will be sworn testimony?

6/20/2008 07:47:00 AM  
Blogger Soros' Proxy said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6/20/2008 07:52:00 AM  
Blogger Soros' Proxy said...

Big as this may be, it's not as big as the current slo-mo capitulation over FISA.

6/20/2008 07:53:00 AM  
Blogger Stella said...

Feinstein's on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Maybe she'll support her constituents this time. She used to be a lot more progressive—now, she's a Pelosi suckup.

6/20/2008 11:19:00 AM  
Blogger Boris said...

The standard Republican rebuttal against McClellan is 100% predictable

6/20/2008 07:22:00 PM  
Blogger DB Cooper said...

Can I have an explanation of Lamar Smith's mind? On one hand he says,

It’s hard to take Mr. McClellan or this hearing seriously.

OTOH, Smith says,

Scott McClellan alone will have to wrestle with whether it was worth selling out the President and his friends for a few pieces of silver.

That, to me, sounds like an admission that McClellan's testimony has biting, hurtful substance to it. Sounds like Smith knows many will take McClellan seriously.

What am I missing?

6/20/2008 07:45:00 PM  
Blogger Ghost Dansing said...

we sorta kinda knew what the deal was..... McClellan is just adding more evidence.... metaphorically applicable......
why d'ya do it, she said

6/21/2008 06:36:00 PM  
Blogger skip sievert said...

It is all fake you price system political flunkies.

6/29/2008 07:19:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home